Re: Pushing patches to staging

[Peekay Ex]

Hello,

On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 6:58 PM, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
> "Phil Holmes" <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> At some point in the near future, I'll need to push a CG patch to
>> update the bug squad rota.  My understanding is that this should now
>> be done to dev/staging rather than master.  I've read David's note
>> about how to do this, and wonder whether that's all necessary for a
>> simple patch that's in my master branch and which I'm not too
>> concerned about.
>
> To push, you need to rebase to your push target, regardless of where you
> are pushing to.  And after that, you do
>
> git push origin HEAD:the-branch-i-push-to
>
> again, regardless of where you are pushing to.  So what is the deal
> about "that's all necessary for a simple patch"?  It is exactly the
> "simple patches" which tend not to get enough testing attention.  Going
> through dev/staging avoids blunders ruining master for others.  I should
> be able to tell...
>
> In addition "necessary for a simple patch" glosses over the fact that
> once you _do_ push to master directly, any complex changes accumulated
> in dev/staging need rebasing to master before they can get into master.
>
> So while you haven't actually made things any simpler for yourself, you
> have created a complication for others (automatic testing and pushing of
> staging is blocked until somebody has manually chosen an appropriate
> merge/rebase strategy for dev/staging and followed through).
>
>> a) could someone provide some really simple git-novice level
>> instructions about how to do this?
>
> Anything wrong with the above?
>
>> b) I don't think this is currently in the CG -  should I add it?
>
> Personally, I'd like to use "staging" instead of the obscure
> "dev/staging".  We need to synchronize this move to both documentation
> and currently employed scripts as well as developer awareness.  Perhaps
> we should agree on a date soon when we'll do that.

So does that mean we are considering this 'staging' branch push
experiment a (near) success or at least something we all agree on or
is that another GOPpy thing? - I know we've had some minor
inconveniences with this method that requires knowledge of git more
than we have needed in the past. I.e it's 'easier' to cry foul and fix
master than push-merge-fetch-rebase-thingy :) even if it is more
serious when master breaks than staging.

I think the instructions above ou gave David are a bit beyond most
non-gitters or beginners like myself, although I suppose if someone
has push privs, there is some level of knowledge expected? From a CG
point of I think your explanation is probably too 'technical' (Graham
as I like to have examples you can literally cut and paste from the CG
into your terminal that will work), but we can iron that out between
Phil, Graham your good self I am sure.

The CG from someone like myself's perspective only ever talks about
origin/master but there is no reason we cannot move the instructions
to use 'staging' instead.

-- 
--
James